Not exactly correct, unless NSW is different to every other state in the country; which I doubt very much.Don't let the door hit you on the way out
They all have to leave to secure their lifetime pensions right.
Get the sack & they'll lose it?
Totally agree. Whilst not a NSW person, she comes across as one of the more 'transparent' politicians in the country, but am sure there will be many from NSW who will disagree. Everyone loves to bag politicians and when he/she, doesnt matter which side, make a mistake or bad judgement call, the media vultures and many others are quickly ready to put the knife in. Yes, there are many pollies who shouldnt be in the job, as for some it was a easy ride through 'jobs for the boys', whether that be via unions, factions or big business. By the same token, there are many who work very hard, put in extremely long hours and genuinely try to do the best for their state/country, but do get caught up with 'party policy', whether they agree or not.I personally think it is bad for NSW, the last thing we need is instability in these times
I thought she was a good communicator with the people and can’t imagine her replacement will be any better
So she had amnesia when she admitted to the ICAC that she 'didnt need to know about this', to me sounds like she was telling the truth. So in all your years Hoyks, you never made a poor decision about a female you went out with?.I thought it was interesting that she got amnesia when she fronted ICAC a while back. Walked out declaring that she had done nothing wrong and the papers were all about how she was so brave. It wasn't her fault she has poor choice in men.
Fast forward a few months and now ICAC announces that they are looking into some of her decisions and allocation of funds as minister. No grand standing and declaring her 100% confidence in her decisions and that ICAC will clear her, nope, quits her job and parliament.
Nothing suss going on there.
She claims she was above board, has inegrity, honesty which will be proven eventually and then resigns.
So gets the retirement /payout benefits.
Better than if found guilty probably gets?????Ha! Ha!
That's a bit of an assumption.Hoyks, you never made a poor decision about a female you went out with?.
@Hoyks, you maybe right in that she had heard rumours etc, but didnt want to know the details. I do agree that allocation of funding to some areas when she was a Minister may look a bit sus, but there are many pollies, state or federal, who have done similar. I still think she has been crucified by ICAC, but had no choice but to resign, but did so with dignity.That's a bit of an assumption.
The I don't need to know about that implies to me that she already knew whatever it was was less than above board and wanted to be able to maintain plausible deniability.
I said if found guilty.????Roger, another one who has no idea how politics operates and how ICAC can destroy any one persons credibility, with ICAC not answerable to anyone. You, along with many others, make a big deal about her retirement/payout benefit she may receive but it wasnt her, or any other current politician, who introduced this scheme. I find it amazing that you have already decided she is guilty......of what may I ask.
A little different for MP's, rightly or wrongly, to the private sector Rogerazz. I am trying to say that most people have a hate of politicians and try to bag them in anyway they can. I work with them and there is no way I would want to do their job. Yes, they have some perks but for many, especially the Prime Minster and ministers in fed/state govts, they can be working 18hrs a day, not 9 to 5 like many of us. They go to functions at night, many see as a perk, when they would rather be at home with their families, but it is what the job is.I said if found guilty.????
Also I have worked managing over forty branches in one of the big four banks as well as State manager in a major Australia wide supermarket where I have seen top management shown the door. I understand the importance of protecting ones retirement benefits by taking a resignation or retirement before a possible dismissal.
I don't hate anyone and I do understand having worked in the Banking industry for thirty five years. I have experienced first hand what many people think about bankers. My job was a performance based contract, working late night, weekend call backs, no RDOs, for no renumeration , definitely no kick backs, etc etc.A little different for MP's, rightly or wrongly, to the private sector Rogerazz. I am trying to say that most people have a hate of politicians and try to bag them in anyway they can. I work with them and there is no way I would want to do their job. Yes, they have some perks but for many, especially the Prime Minster and ministers in fed/state govts, they can be working 18hrs a day, not 9 to 5 like many of us. They go to functions at night, many see as a perk, when they would rather be at home with their families, but it is what the job is.
What I am trying to say is that Gladys has been crucified now, but in the long term she will have a better life and will finish up being financially rewarded when she enters the private sector.